Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

Institutional members access full text with Ovid®

Sexual Partner Types and Incident HIV Infection Among Rural South African Adolescent Girls and Young Women Enrolled in HPTN 068

A Latent Class Analysis

Nguyen, Nadia PhDa,b; Powers, Kimberly A. PhDa; Miller, William C. MD, PhD, MPHc; Howard, Annie Green PhDd,e; Halpern, Carolyn T. PhDe,f; Hughes, James P. PhDg,h; Wang, Jing MS, MAh; Twine, Rhian MPHi; Gomez-Olive, F. Xavier MD, PhDi,j; MacPhail, Catherine PhDi,k,l; Kahn, Kathleen MD, PhDi,j,m; Pettifor, Audrey E. PhDa,e,i

JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes: September 1, 2019 - Volume 82 - Issue 1 - p 24–33
doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000002096
Epidemiology
Buy
SDC

Background: Sexual partners are the primary source of incident HIV infection among adolescent girls and young women (AGYW) in sub-Saharan Africa. Identifying partner types at greatest risk of HIV transmission could guide the design of tailored HIV prevention interventions.

Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of data from AGYW (aged 13–23 years) enrolled in a randomized controlled trial of cash transfers for HIV prevention in South Africa. Annually, AGYW reported behavioral and demographic characteristics of their 3 most recent sexual partners, categorized each partner using prespecified labels, and received HIV testing. We used latent class analysis (LCA) to identify partner types from reported characteristics, and generalized estimating equations to estimate the relationship between both LCA-identified and prespecified partner types and incident HIV infection.

Results: Across 2140 AGYW visits, 1034 AGYW made 2968 partner reports and 63 AGYW acquired HIV infection. We identified 5 LCA partner types, which we named monogamous HIV-negative peer partner; one-time protected in-school peer partner; out-of-school older partner; anonymous out-of-school peer partner; and cohabiting with children in-school peer partner. Compared to AGYW with only monogamous HIV-negative peer partners, AGYW with out-of-school older partners had 2.56 times the annual risk of HIV infection (95% confidence interval: 1.23 to 5.33), whereas AGYW with anonymous out-of-school peer partners had 1.72 times the risk (95% confidence interval: 0.82 to 3.59). Prespecified partner types were not associated with incident HIV.

Conclusion: By identifying meaningful combinations of partner characteristics and predicting the corresponding risk of HIV acquisition among AGYW, LCA-identified partner types may provide new insights for the design of tailored HIV prevention interventions.

aDepartment of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC;

bHIV Center for Clinical and Behavioral Studies, New York State Psychiatric Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY;

cDivision of Epidemiology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH;

dDepartment of Biostatistics, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC;

eCarolina Population Center, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC;

fDepartment of Maternal and Child Health, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC;

gDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA;

hFred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA;

iMedical Research Council/Wits Rural Public Health and Health Transitions Research Unit (Agincourt), School of Public Health, Faculty of the Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa;

jINDEPTH Network, Accra, Ghana;

kWits Reproductive Health and HIV Research Institute, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa;

lSchool of Health and Society, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia; and

mEpidemiology and Global Health Unit, Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.

Correspondence to: Nadia Nguyen, PhD, HIV Center for Clinical and Behavioral Studies, New York State Psychiatric Institute, Columbia University, 722 W 168, New York, NY 10032 (e-mail: nadia.nguyen@nyspi.columbia.edu).

Supported by NIH Grants T32MH19139, L60MD013176, T32AI007001, P30MH43520, UM1AI068619, UM1AI068613, and UM1AI1068617. The HIV Prevention Trials Network is funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (UM1AI068619, UM1AI068613, and UM1AI1068617), with cofunding from the National Institute of Mental Health and the National Institute on Drug Abuse, all components of the US National Institutes of Health. This work was also supported by NIMH (R01MH087118) and the Carolina Population Center and its NIH Center grant (P2C HD050924). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Presented at CROI 2018; March 5, 2018; Boston, MA.

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Supplemental digital content is available for this article. Direct URL citations appear in the printed text and are provided in the HTML and PDF versions of this article on the journal's Web site (www.jaids.com).

Received December 07, 2018

Accepted April 17, 2019

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial License 4.0 (CCBY-NC), where it is permissible to download, share, remix, transform, and buildup the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be used commercially without permission from the journal.

Copyright © 2019 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.